Nikon AF-P DX 70-300mm f/4.5-6.3G ED VR or Not?

[mncorrado]

Call me confused...

I have a D7100 that I enjoy.  More so as it is the only digital body I have.  Perhaps someday a used D810 or D850 in a few years.  Hopes and dreams perhaps.

Anyway I need some additional length for taking track and field photos.  My Nikon 18-140 f.3.5-5.6 has worked OK for cross country running as I am able to be on the course.  As the track and field season has arrived I suspect I will be unable to get the reach I need with my 18-140 from the stands or elsewhere.  So I am looking at the 70-300.

Is using the non VR version a big deal if I am shooting at 1000th of a second or faster handheld?  I am pretty steady handheld.

OR

Should I just go with the VR version of the lens?  Yes I know that at the moment I will be unable to turn off the VR on my D7100.

I am leaning toward the non VR version primarily due to the cost and potentially better IQ at times?

I can lean toward the VR version more if there is some hope that Nikon will someday provide a way to disable the VR on my D7100.  I wish they would just say one way or another if a firmware update to disable the VR is in the pipeline.

Any nudges one way or another on the VR vs. Non-VR lens for my particular need?

[Les Olson]

The hand tremor the system is trying to compensate for is quite slow - 8-10 cycles per second, so if the shutter speed is 1/1000 you should not see a large effect of hand tremor.

The problem is that VR can degrade the image when you have a very fast shutter speed.  The operating frequency of the Nikon VR system is 1000 cycles per second: ie, it takes 1/1000 sec to detect camera movement and move the compensating element.  So, if the shutter speed is 1/100 the system makes ten adjustments during the exposure.  When you half-press the shutter , or press AF-ON, the VR system is activated. When you press the shutter fully the VR system re-centres the compensating element as the shutter opens (https://www.nikonusa.com/Images/Micro-Sites/VR/technology/centering/).  If the shutter speed is 1/1000 the system only makes one adjustment, towards the end of the exposure.  At a shutter speed above 1/250 there is no point when the whole sensor is exposed: the shutter forms a slit that crosses the sensor.  So, at 1/1000 the compensating element will be in different places when the top and bottom parts of the sensor are exposed and moving in between.  That will degrade the image.  Of course, that also happens when the shutter speed is 1/100, but in that case the improvement caused by compensating for hand shake is much greater than the loss caused by moving lens elements during exposure.

So, at 1/1000 you should be turning VR off, so if you are sure you will be at 1/1000 you would be better of with the non-VR lens than with VR you can't turn off.

[mncorrado]

Thanks... the information you shared is exactly what I was looking for!

[bovk]

Full article : http://www.bythom.com/nikon-vr.htm, very detailed high quality article

[OCD]

This is a bummer situation.  I use this lens with a D5300 and like it very much.  However, through the menu system I can choose to turn VR on or off.  I mostly have it on since I don't shoot fast moving subjects very often, but if I was shooting above 1/500 I would want to be able to turn off the VR.  Not having control of this feature is the bummer.  If you're not shooting faster than 1/500 or 1/1000 very often, then having the VR on all the time is probably not a big deal, and perhaps Nikon will finally get around to a firmware update which would solve this issue, which would be very nice since it's a really good lens.  I personally could not use a telephoto lens without VR though, it really does work great.

[Gil Aegerter]

Sorry to be two years late to this conversation. The first image is one of the first that I took with my non-VR version of the 70-300mm AF-P DX lens, which I bought nearly new for $74 (I sold a copy of the image for $100). The second image I took with the VR version. Frankly, I can't tell much difference in use, but then I didn't get these for lower-light situations. On a D5500, I find them excellent travel lenses because they're so light.

[Matthew Currie]

Nice results.  I solved the software issue on a D7100 by springing for the extra cost and slight extra size of the FX version, which has all the switches on it, and is thus fully compatible.  It's also of course a little faster at the high end, and supposedly a little sharper.  When I raced mine with my wife's earlier 70-300 AFG, it won noticeably though that one isn't so bad either.

I would have gone along with the DX VR version, since my main use is for traveling without a tripod anyway (and since I could be quite sure any new model would outperform my rather sorry 55-300DX) , but some reviews suggested that the VR in that version is not friendly for panning birds in flight.  The extent to which that may be true I don't know, but the FX version gets BIF all right, and is still just small enough to go in my limited travel kit.

[CS]

Sorry to be two years late to this conversation. The first image is one of the first that I took with my non-VR version of the 70-300mm AF-P DX lens, which I bought nearly new for $74 (I sold a copy of the image for $100). The second image I took with the VR version. Frankly, I can't tell much difference in use, but then I didn't get these for lower-light situations. On a D5500, I find them excellent travel lenses because they're so light.

I like that pelican shot, and mentioning Newport Beach makes me want some Mo's clam chowder! 

[Hermann]

Nice results.  I solved the software issue on a D7100 by springing for the extra cost and slight extra size of the FX version, which has all the switches on it, and is thus fully compatible.  It's also of course a little faster at the high end, and supposedly a little sharper.  When I raced mine with my wife's earlier 70-300 AFG, it won noticeably though that one isn't so bad either.

I've got both, and I agree, there isn't much difference optically. But I feel that even on bodies that allow you to switch off VR the FX is well worth the higher weight (and the higher price). No menue diving, you can switch between VR off, VR Normal and VR Sport (which I prefer most of the time) easily and quickly.

I find the 70-300 so good that I refrained from getting the 300mm PF so far. Sure, the 300 PF is better but the 70-300 is very good indeed, and the AF is incredibly fast. And because I tend to use longer focal lengths most of the time anyway, even for landscape photography, I often only take the 70-300.

For the money both 70-300s are a steal.

Hermann